Kyiv reeled under Russia’s largest aerial assault since the Ukraine war began in 2022, with 550 drones and missiles raining down on the capital, injuring 23 people and devastating civilian infrastructure. The timing—hours after a phone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin—has raised questions about a possible connection. As Ukraine struggles to defend itself amid a U.S. pause in critical weapons shipments, and with the European Union stepping up to fill the gap.
The Night of Terror: Russia’s Record-Breaking Assault on Kyiv
Russia’s overnight barrage on July 4, 2025, marked a grim milestone in its war against Ukraine. According to Ukraine’s Air Force, Moscow deployed 539 Shahed-type drones, six ballistic missiles, four Iskander cruise missiles, and one Kinzhal aeroballistic missile, targeting Kyiv and other regions. The capital bore the brunt, with nine missiles and 63 drones striking eight districts, including Solomianskyi, Holosiivskyi, and Shevchenkivskyi. Debris from downed projectiles caused fires and damage in over 30 additional locations, affecting homes, a school, a medical facility, shops, and railway infrastructure. Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko reported 23 injuries, 14 requiring hospitalization, and warned of hazardous air quality due to smoke from fires.
Kyiv resident Joseph Haim Roche, whose brother-in-law serves on the frontlines, described the escalating intensity to Euronews: “The Shahed drones are far more numerous and deadlier than before. We tend to take shelter even for drone attacks—we’ve all got a bit paranoid.” Roche recounted sleepless nights in overcrowded metro station shelters, reflecting the exhaustion felt after three and a half years of war. “It’s damp, there’s not enough space, and during major attacks, it gets way too crowded,” he said, adding, “It’s started to become hard.” The attack’s scale, described by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as “deliberately massive and cynical,” underscores Russia’s unrelenting aggression.
The Trump-Putin Call: Coincidence or Catalyst?
The timing of the attack, just hours after a July 3, 2025, phone call between Trump and Putin, has fueled speculation about a connection. Trump announced the call on Truth Social, describing it as yielding “no progress at all” toward a ceasefire. Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov confirmed the nearly hour-long discussion covered Ukraine and the Middle East but claimed the U.S. weapons pause was not addressed. Putin reiterated Russia’s focus on resolving the war’s “root causes”—a euphemism for opposing Ukraine’s NATO aspirations and securing territorial gains. Ukrainian officials, including Zelenskyy, noted that air raid alerts blared almost simultaneously with media reports of the call, suggesting Russia’s attack was a deliberate signal of defiance.
Posts on X reflect growing suspicion, with some users alleging Russia used the call to gauge U.S. resolve before escalating. One post claimed, “Putin wants to destroy Ukraine, not negotiate peace,” suggesting the attack was a response to perceived U.S. weakness. However, these claims remain speculative, as no direct evidence links the call to Russia’s military planning. Trump’s frustration, expressed as disappointment that Putin is “not looking to stop,” aligns with Putin’s insistence on achieving Russia’s goals, including territorial control and neutralizing Ukraine’s NATO ambitions. The call, the sixth between the leaders since Trump’s return to office, reflects a strained U.S.-Russia dialogue amid Moscow’s battlefield escalation.
Why Ukraine Appears Defenseless
Ukraine’s vulnerability in the face of Russia’s onslaught stems from multiple factors, exacerbated by the July 2025 attack’s unprecedented scale:
-
Depleted Air Defenses: Ukraine’s Air Force neutralized 478 drones and two cruise missiles, a remarkable feat, but the sheer volume of attacks overwhelmed systems like the U.S.-supplied Patriot missiles. A senior Ukrainian commander warned that without new air defense supplies, Kyiv may resort to high-risk tactics, as seen in the death of an F-16 pilot battling Russian drones. The June 2025 loss of 5,000 drones and 330 missiles further strained Ukraine’s defenses.
-
U.S. Weapons Pause: On July 1, 2025, the Pentagon halted shipments of critical weapons, including Patriot interceptors and precision-guided artillery, citing dwindling U.S. stockpiles. Trump publicly stated that the U.S. had “given Ukraine too many weapons” under the Biden administration, raising concerns about America’s military readiness. This pause, the second since Trump’s return to office, caught Kyiv off guard and directly weakened its ability to counter Russia’s aerial barrage. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha warned that delays “encourage the aggressor to continue war and terror.”
-
Battlefield Pressures: Russia’s deployment of 50,000 troops near Sumy and small assault groups in Donetsk has exploited gaps in Ukrainian defenses, particularly around Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka. These advances disrupt supply lines, diverting resources from air defense to ground operations. The United Nations reports a 50% surge in civilian casualties in 2025, with 13,134 killed and 31,867 injured, highlighting the human toll of Ukraine’s stretched defenses.
-
Psychological and Physical Exhaustion: Residents like Roche describe a war-weary population struggling with inadequate shelters and constant alerts. The attack’s disruption of railway infrastructure and civilian facilities further erodes morale and logistical capacity. Zelenskyy’s call for “large-scale pressure” on Russia reflects frustration with Ukraine’s limited means to counter such assaults.
The U.S. Halt in Supplies: A Strategic Shift?
The U.S. decision to pause weapons shipments has sparked intense debate. The Trump administration’s rationale—preserving U.S. stockpiles—reflects a broader “America First” policy shift. Trump’s remarks at a NATO summit, where he called negotiating with Putin “more difficult” than expected, suggest a recalibration of U.S. support for Ukraine. The pause, announced on July 1, 2025, follows a brief suspension in March 2025, which was lifted after a week. Ukrainian officials estimate they can sustain operations for four to six months without new aid, but the loss of air defense interceptors is particularly crippling amid Russia’s intensified strikes.
Zelenskyy has sought to mitigate the impact, stating on July 3, 2025, that Kyiv and Washington are “clarifying all the details” of defense support. Ukraine has proposed purchasing U.S. weapons rather than relying on donations, signaling a shift toward self-reliance. However, this strategy faces hurdles, as Ukraine’s economy, battered by war, lacks the funds for large-scale purchases. The death of American volunteer Fred Grandy in a Russian attack underscores the human cost of reduced U.S. support, with his family citing frustration over the policy reversal.
The European Union’s Role: Stepping Up Amid U.S. Uncertainty
As U.S. support wavers, the European Union has emerged as a critical lifeline for Ukraine. At a July 2025 meeting in Aarhus, Denmark, EU leaders, including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Antonio Costa, pledged increased military supplies and financing to help Ukraine produce its own weapons. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen emphasized Europe’s responsibility to “fill the gap” if U.S. aid falters, stating, “The war in Ukraine has never been about Ukraine—it’s about Europe.” The EU also boosted Ukraine’s electricity import capacity by 38.5%, providing economic relief for rebuilding power facilities destroyed by Russian attacks.
French President Emmanuel Macron’s July 1, 2025, call with Putin—the first in nearly three years—signals Europe’s attempt to engage diplomatically while bolstering Ukraine’s defenses. EU foreign policy chief Kaya Kallas has urged China to halt supplies aiding Russia, reflecting broader efforts to isolate Moscow. Ukraine’s push for EU membership, strongly supported by von der Leyen, further aligns Kyiv with European security structures, challenging Putin’s opposition to NATO and EU expansion. However, European aid, while significant, struggles to match the scale of U.S. contributions, which have included air defense systems, tanks, and rocket launchers since 2022.
Exploring the Trump-Putin Call Connection
The timing of Russia’s attack raises questions about its relation to the Trump-Putin call. Several angles emerge:
-
Signaling Defiance: Zelenskyy’s observation that air raid alerts coincided with call reports suggests Russia aimed to demonstrate resolve. Putin’s insistence on addressing “root causes” like NATO expansion indicates no willingness to de-escalate, using the attack to underscore his position.
-
Exploiting U.S. Hesitation: The U.S. weapons pause, announced days before the call, may have emboldened Russia to test Ukraine’s weakened defenses. The Kremlin welcomed the suspension, claiming it could hasten the war’s end by forcing Kyiv to negotiate on Moscow’s terms.
-
Diplomatic Stalemate: Trump’s push for an immediate ceasefire contrasts with Putin’s focus on territorial and strategic goals, as confirmed by Ushakov. The lack of progress in the call may have prompted Russia to escalate militarily, signaling that negotiations are secondary to battlefield gains.
-
Psychological Warfare: The attack’s scale and timing could be a deliberate attempt to demoralize Ukraine and pressure Western allies. Posts on X describe Russia’s strategy as “terror and murder,” with the Kyiv assault designed to exploit Ukraine’s exhaustion and limited resources.
While no definitive evidence ties the call directly to the attack, the sequence of events—U.S. aid pause, Trump-Putin dialogue, and Russia’s immediate escalation—suggests Moscow is capitalizing on perceived Western disunity.
Why Russia’s Attacks Are Intensifying
Russia’s escalation reflects strategic and tactical shifts:
-
Military Momentum: Advances in Donetsk and Sumy, coupled with the deployment of 50,000 troops and advanced drones, indicate Russia’s intent to exploit Ukraine’s vulnerabilities before winter. The use of Kinzhal hypersonic missiles and chemical weapons, as reported by Dutch intelligence, signals a willingness to employ extreme measures.
-
Geopolitical Leverage: Putin’s rejection of ceasefire talks and focus on “root causes” align with his broader goal of countering NATO and securing Russian influence. The attack may aim to pressure Ukraine into concessions as U.S. support wanes.
-
Economic and Psychological Impact: By targeting Kyiv’s infrastructure, Russia seeks to disrupt Ukraine’s economy and morale. The damage to railway lines and civilian facilities, coupled with hazardous air quality, compounds the war’s toll on civilians.
World watches a critical juncture
Russia’s massive attack on Kyiv, following the Trump-Putin call, underscores the precarious state of Ukraine’s defenses amid a U.S. weapons pause and intensifying Russian aggression. The assault’s scale—550 drones and missiles—overwhelmed Kyiv, highlighting Ukraine’s reliance on Western aid and the exhaustion of its people. The Trump-Putin call, yielding no ceasefire progress, may have emboldened Russia to exploit U.S. hesitation, signaling defiance through a devastating barrage. The EU’s stepped-up support offers hope, but its capacity to replace U.S. aid is limited. As Zelenskyy calls for tougher sanctions and air defenses, the world watches a critical juncture in the war, where Ukraine’s resilience faces its toughest test yet.
